A blog commenting on various aspects of the private collecting and trade in archaeological artefacts today and their effect on the archaeological record.

Saturday, 11 August 2012

Controversy over the Discovery of the Ringlemere Cup

.
There has been an interesting addition to the discussion in the people's encyclopedia of the discovery of the Ringlemere Cup , one of the PAS' flagship finds. The edit of the Wikipedia page was made 18:28, 21 July 2012‎ by an individual signified only by the number 86.135.9.159 as a special contribution. Whoever the author was, he seems to have an axe to grind with the archaeologists involved in the subsequent project. Although it has been there for a while, I imagine this text will be severely edited when spotted, so to save the reader hunting it down in the 'history' page, reproduce it here:

Mr Cliff Bradshaw is a very interested amateur archaeologist. His
main area of study is the Saxons 400AD - 600AD. His fascination for this
period led him to undertaking studies and the scouring of the local
countryside of south-east Kent for Saxon remains. In the course of his
explorations as a detectorist he found a number of items including a
beautiful silver Saxon strap end, three sceattas, and many brooch
fragments fairly close together. The number and proximity of these items
led him to believe that they were not simply accidental losses but that
this was an inhabited Saxon settlement and that he would find a burial
mound nearby. Over the twelve to fifteen months he had access to the
field he carefully scanned all aspects of the land and in doing so was
able to make out the faint outline of a raised section of field. Without
wanting to jump to conclusions he felt sure that this was what he was
looking for. He commenced his detecting to the south side of the mound
and very quickly found a Saxon gilded brooch at a depth of eight to ten
inches. The following day he continued his search on the northern
perimeter of his suspected Saxon burial site; he knew from his
experience as a detectorist that he would have a better chance of making
a discovery on the shallower edge of the mound than he would at the
deeper centre. He found the Ringlemere Cup. This was to prove to have
important consequences for him as he was now obliged to stop his search
for confirmation of Saxon burials.

Mr Bradshaw was certain the cup was not Saxon; he also knew that the
Saxons placed a great importance on prehistoric earthworks and used them
for their burials. That evening he discovered the similarities his find
had with the Rillaton Cup. He was convinced that the gold cup belonged
to an earlier age, revered and left alone by the Saxons who had used the
site for their burials.

On the first site visit Mr Bradshaw said that this was a Saxon
burial, but Mr Keith Parfitt, the local archaeologist replied, ‘This is a
Bronze Age Barrow of great importance, we won’t find any Saxons here’.
Mr Bradshaw pointed out that the gilded brooch was very likely from a
grave and that his studies indicated that the Saxons used these Ancient
Barrows for their dead. Again Mr Parfitt replied ‘Not in Kent’. However a
report written later by Mr Parfitt appears to give credence to Mr
Bradshaw’s thoughts; he wrote that the brooch found by Mr Bradshaw could
be derived from a plough damaged grave and that ‘Anglo-Saxon
cemeteries, focused on Prehistoric Barrow sites, are becoming
increasingly well known’.

From the moment he discovered the mound in November 2001 and against
all opposing statements from the archaeologists on site, Mr Bradshaw
continued to insist that this was a Saxon Burial Site. Finally in the
summer of 2004 he was vindicated when Anglo-Saxon burials were found on
the south side of the barrow. This discovery overturned the earlier
hypothesis that a single sunken hut indicted that the Saxons had chosen
the spot for habitation.

Much controversy has reigned over the location of the find of the
Gold Cup. Mr Bradshaw had paced measured from a nearby electricity pole.
However, it appears that this did not suit the theories of the local
archaeologists and no first hand account from Mr Bradshaw was sought for
the publication The Ringlemere Cup edited by S Needham, K Parfitt and
G Varnell, British Museum Oct 10 2006. On reviewing the book John
Barrett, professor of archaeology at the University of Sheffield found
it strange that it lacked a first hand account by the finder.

I think we may fairly speculate that we probably now have that in the current version of the Wikipedia entry.

We may note that this "very interested amateur archaeologist" whose "main area of study is the Saxons 400AD - 600AD" seems not to have published anything on the topic.

I really cannot see why the author of this piece imputes that archaeologist Parfitt denied the possible existence of Early Medieval burial mounds when just down the road is the well-known Finglesham cemetery, nearby is Sittingbourne and more importantly the site at Mill Hill Deal - actually excavated by Keith Parfitt.

The Wikipedian eisegete's comments on the "location of the find of the
Gold Cup" (ie it was found on the eroded mound's north edge and not nearer its centre) is based on the original finder's account of having "paced measured (sic) from a nearby electricity pole". It is a shame that the finder - who was out in the field we are told to locate Early Medieval graves - did not have with him more sophisticated means of providing an exact findspot, steel tapes as a minimum, an accurate handheld GPS as an ideal. How can an individual grave good be precisely located in relation to other features perhaps discovered on different occasions by "pacing from a (single) electricity pole?" (answer: quite obviously, it cannot - no way). Without that, I would say, Mr Bradshaw cannot really have any claim to have been doing amateur archaeology, but amateurish hoiking. This is the whole problem with relating metal detector finds made by people out to collect isolated objects to archaeological layers, features and stratificatory processes studied by archaeological investigation. In the way it is usually done in Britain, so-called "metal detecting" is not "doing archaeology".

No comments:

About Me

British archaeologist living and working in Warsaw, Poland. Since the early 1990s (or even longer) a primary interest has been research on artefact hunting and collecting and the market in portable antiquities in the international context and their effect on the archaeological record.

Abbreviations used in this blog

"coiney" - a term I use for private collector of dug up ancient coins, particularly a member of the Moneta-L forum or the ACCG

"heap-of-artefacts-on-a-table-collecting" the term rather speaks for itself, an accumulation of loose artefacts with no attempt to link each item with documented origins. Most often used to refer to metal detectorists (ice-cream tubs-full) and ancient coin collectors (Roman coins sold in aggregated bulk lots)